Re: 2.6.29.3: iwlwifi WARNING

reinette chatre
2009-05-19T15:42:05Z

Hi Arnd,

On Tue, 2009-05-19 at 08:13 -0700, Arnd Hannemann wrote:
> Hi Reinette,
>
> reinette chatre schrieb:
> > Hi Arnd,
> >
> > On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 23:39 -0700, Arnd Hannemann wrote:
> >> Hi,
> >>
> >> I'm using ubuntu jaunty with 2.6.29.3 mainline build:
> >> http://kernel.ubuntu.com/~kernel-ppa/mainline/v2.6.29.3/
> >>
> >> And from time to time get this:
> >>
> >> [98439.060208] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> >> [98439.060217] WARNING: at
> >> /home/kernel-ppa/mainline/build/drivers/net/wireless/iwlwifi/iwl-sta.c:728
> >> iwl_set_tkip_dynamic_key_info+0xc0/0xd0 [iwlcore]()
> >> [98439.060224] Hardware name: 20552PG
> >> [98439.060228] no space for new kewModules linked in: nls_iso8859_1
> >> nls_cp437 vfat fat usb_storage binfmt_misc i915 drm i2c_algo_bit ppdev
> >> bnep ipt_MASQUERADE iptable_nat nf_nat nf_conntrack_ipv4 nf_defrag_ipv4
> >> xt_state nf_conntrack ipt_
> >> REJECT xt_tcpudp iptable_filter ip_tables x_tables bridge stp kvm_intel
> >> kvm sbp2 lp parport snd_hda_codec_conexant joydev snd_hda_intel
> >> snd_hda_codec snd_pcm_oss snd_mixer_oss snd_pcm snd_seq_dummy
> >> snd_seq_oss snd_seq_midi snd_rawmidi sn
> >> d_seq_midi_event arc4 ecb snd_seq snd_timer snd_seq_device iwlagn
> >> iwlcore snd mac80211 soundcore thinkpad_acpi pcmcia sdhci_pci sdhci
> >> psmouse iTCO_wdt video intel_agp agpgart snd_page_alloc pcspkr nvram
> >> yenta_socket rsrc_nonstatic pcmcia
> >> _core ricoh_mmc led_class iTCO_vendor_support serio_raw btusb output
> >> cfg80211 sha256_generic aes_i586 aes_generic cbc ohci1394 ieee1394
> >> e1000e dm_crypt
> >> [98439.060372] Pid: 10, comm: events/0 Not tainted
> >> 2.6.29-02062903-generic #02062903
> >> [98439.060377] Call Trace:
> >> [98439.060394] [<c013a636>] warn_slowpath+0x86/0xa0
> >> [98439.060409] [<c04f7938>] ? _spin_lock+0x8/0x10
> >> [98439.060418] [<c01e967c>] ? inotify_d_instantiate+0x3c/0x50
> >> [98439.060427] [<c028879c>] ? security_d_instantiate+0x1c/0x20
> >> [98439.060436] [<c01cebf8>] ? d_instantiate+0x38/0x40
> >> [98439.060444] [<c01cf3c7>] ? dput+0x67/0xd0
> >> [98439.060453] [<c01220f8>] ? default_spin_lock_flags+0x8/0x10
> >> [98439.060460] [<c04f78e2>] ? _spin_lock_irqsave+0x32/0x50
> >> [98439.060489] [<f80ea900>] iwl_set_tkip_dynamic_key_info+0xc0/0xd0
> >> [iwlcore]
> >> [98439.060523] [<f80eac5f>] iwl_set_dynamic_key+0x5f/0x80 [iwlcore]
> >> [98439.060546] [<f81a5793>] iwl_mac_set_key+0xf3/0x120 [iwlagn]
> >> [98439.060565] [<f81a56a0>] ? iwl_mac_set_key+0x0/0x120 [iwlagn]
> >> [98439.060606] [<f8097fd3>] ieee80211_key_enable_hw_accel+0x53/0xc0
> >> [mac80211]
> >> [98439.060622] [<c027a9fc>] ? debugfs_remove+0x4c/0x60
> >> [98439.060665] [<f8098168>] __ieee80211_key_todo+0xe8/0x130 [mac80211]
> >> [98439.060674] [<c04f6044>] ? schedule+0x2f4/0x570
> >> [98439.060681] [<c04f69eb>] ? mutex_lock+0xb/0x20
> >> [98439.060727] [<f80982cd>] ieee80211_key_todo+0xd/0x20 [mac80211]
> >> [98439.060767] [<f8098368>] key_todo+0x8/0x10 [mac80211]
> >> [98439.060775] [<c014b344>] run_workqueue+0xd4/0x170
> >> [98439.060815] [<f8098360>] ? key_todo+0x0/0x10 [mac80211]
> >> [98439.060824] [<c014bd28>] worker_thread+0x88/0xe0
> >> [98439.060832] [<c014ede0>] ? autoremove_wake_function+0x0/0x40
> >> [98439.060840] [<c014bca0>] ? worker_thread+0x0/0xe0
> >> [98439.060846] [<c014ea72>] kthread+0x42/0x70
> >> [98439.060852] [<c014ea30>] ? kthread+0x0/0x70
> >> [98439.060860] [<c0103da7>] kernel_thread_helper+0x7/0x10
> >> [98439.060865] ---[ end trace 3b8aa73681896774 ]---
> >> [102020.364126] iwlagn: Removing wrong key 1 0x410b
> >> [102020.364274] ------------[ cut here ]------------
> >>
> >> and then this very same message spams my dmesg.
> >> Computer is a Lenovo T500 with Core2Duo.
> >>
> >
> >
> > Could you please try this patch? It can be found in 2.6.30 and applies
> > with some fuzz to 2.6.29. If it works for you then we can look into
> > backporting it to 2.6.29.
>
> I'm running on 2.6.30-rc6 for one day now, which I believe contains the mentioned
> patch and I could not trigger the warning yet.
> Not sure if this is enough evidence that the mentioned patch solved my issue ;-)
> However, something probably did.

Yes - 2.6.30-rc6 contains that patch. I'll look into getting it into
2.6.29 stable.

Thank you very much for the testing.

Reinette